[TenTec] RX-350

[Bill Taylor(W4WBT)]

Consumers of these types of radios could care less abut a 
transmitter. They are more interested in the audio quality of the 
output, the ability to insert carrier into a received Am signal to 
reduce fading(AM sync service), the ability for a wide aray of AGC 
settings and wide bandwidth setting on SSB with HIFI quality audio. 
The ability to operate on Frequencies with massive amounts of RF and 
commercial broadcast stations(Put your att on on a jupiter on 40 
meter band at night and listen to what you don't hear). A lot of SWL 
activity is in the broadcast band where you might have a 50KW station 
close by.  In other words there are lots of differences in the design 
or programming of a receiver for SWL use as compared to Ham use.
Bill Taylor
W4WBT
PS-Ten-Tec told me when I placed my order with them that they were 
looking at a Thanksgiving ship. my guess is that it will be later. 
However, if you are interested, place your order with Ten-tec, not 
universal radio. The return policy is much easier to handle.




>back to rich's question... "Am I missing something "
>
>or for 10$ more,,,let us see :
>1.  I loose a  100 watt transmitter .
>2 ?????
>3. ????
>
>I do not believe that there are consumers who will pay $ 10.00 more 
>for a receiver because there is no transmitter board. ( not even 
>swls).
>Hopefully someone will come up and illuminate the situation.
>
>
>bill
>
>
>At 04:20 PM 10/6/01, Michael A. Newell, WB4HUC wrote:
>>I think you're comparing apples and oranges. Not that
>>ham operators wouldn't find the receiver useful, but its
>>primary market is shortwave listeners, not hams. What's
>>important to hams probably doesn't matter to SWL's,
>>and vice versa.
>>
>>A more reasonable comparison would be to the Drake
>>R8B ($1379), the AOR AR-7030 ($1469.95), the JRC
>>NRD-545 ($1799.95), etc.
>>
>>The Drake price is from the Drake web site, all others
>>are from the Universal Radio web site, and you'll notice
>>all these receivers are MORE expensive than the RX-350.
>>
>>73,
>>
>>Mike - WB4HUC
>>Austin, TX
>>http://wb4huc.home.texas.net
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: rich a. <rckchp@home.com>
>>To: Victor and Lisbeth Trucco <trucco@hevanet.com>; <tentec@contesting.com>
>>Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 3:36 PM
>>Subject: Re: [TenTec] RX-350
>>
>>
>>>  The RX-350 price is $1199.00........and the Jupiter is priced at $1189.00,
>>>  and has general coverage recieve built in.........am I missing
>>>  something?????
>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>  From: "Victor and Lisbeth Trucco" <trucco@hevanet.com>
>>>  To: <tentec@contesting.com>
>>>  Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 10:38 AM
>>>  Subject: [TenTec] RX-350
>>>
>>>
>>>  > Universal Radio just announced the release of the RX-350 on their site.
>>>  It
>>>  > looks like the radio is housed in the Jupiter cabinet with SAM added.
>>See
>>>  > at: http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/commrxvr/0350.html  It looks
>>>  > Ten-Tec hasn't had a chance to update their website yet....
>>>  >
>>>  > Anyone had a chance to use one of these yet?
>>>  >
>>>  > 73's,
>>>  >
>>>  > Victor Trucco
>>>  > KD6PTO
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > _______________________________________________
>>>  > TenTec mailing list
>>  > > TenTec@contesting.com
>>>  > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>  >
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>  TenTec mailing list
>>>  TenTec@contesting.com
>>>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>TenTec mailing list
>>TenTec@contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>_______________________________________________
>TenTec mailing list
>TenTec@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec